Six-Month Running Stats

Runners, like cyclists, can become numbers dorks. Few of us are going to win races, so it comes down to what the data tells us about how we're doing. That's what makes Nike+ such a good thing. A friend told me he's gotten back into running because of Nike+, since the numbers tell a clear a story about his improvement. I don't run with music, and I don't use Nikes, so Nike+ isn't ideal for me. Lately, I've used Facebook's RunLogger to keep track of my workouts. It's not exact and has very few functions, but it's alright for now. Yesterday, I reached the six-month mark of charting my runs with RunLogger. Here's the profile:

1,031: total miles
29.1: miles per week
7:33: avg pace
5.3: days spent running
Des Moines/Omaha: the cities I'd be between if I just started heading west last August.

Overall, it's not a bad picture, mostly because it doesn't include the peak running time of the spring and early summer. I think the pace is off, since I don't know the exact distance for my runs. Now that I'm doing many of my workouts in Central Park, it's clear I'm training at a 7:00-7:15 pace.